Search results

Indefinite immigration detention causes well-documented harms to mental health, and international condemnation and resistance leave it undisrupted. Health care is non-independent from immigration control, compromising clinical ethics. Attempts to establish protected, independent clinical review and subvert the system via advocacy and political engagement have had limited success.

The purpose of this study is to examine the following: how indefinite detention for deterrence (exemplified by Australia) injures asylum-seekers; how international legal authorities confirm Australia’s cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment; how detention compromises health-care ethics and hurts health professionals; to weigh arguments for and against boycotting immigration detention; and to discover how health professionals might address these harms, achieving significant change.

Secondary data analyses and ethical argumentation were employed.

Australian Governments fully understand and accept policy-based injuries. They purposefully dispense cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and intend suffering that causes measurable harms for arriving asylum-seekers exercising their right under Australian law. Health professionals are ethically conflicted, not wanting to abandon patients yet constrained. Indefinite detention prevents them from alleviating sufferings and invites collusion, potentially strengthening harms; thwarts scientific inquiry and evidence-based interventions; and endangers their health whether they resist, leave or remain. Governments have primary responsibility for detained asylum-seekers’ health care. Health professional organisations should negotiate the minimum requirements for their members’ participation to ensure independence, and prevent conflicts of interest and inadvertent collaboration with and enabling systemic harms.

Australia’s aggressive approach may become normalised, without its illegality being determined. Health professional colleges uniting over conditions of participation would foreground ethics and pressure governments internationally over this contagious and inexcusable policy.

This chapter discusses the use of law and legal institutions by the emerging social movement seeking to end Australia’s policy of mandatory detention for refugees and asylum seekers. Through an examination of Australian inquiries and court cases alongside social campaigns, it considers the ability of legal institutional responses to identify the harms, in particular state and institutional responsibility, and the subsequent impact of these legal processes in inhibiting and promoting social and structural change. It shows how social movements are harnessing law and creating new legal and civic spaces in which to contest Australia’s refugee and asylum seeker regime.

This paper argues that the nation's immigration laws are being misused to craft a system of preventive administrative detention of immigrant men, predominantly of Middle Eastern background. These detentions give rise to imprisonment without charge for weeks and months, denial of access to lawyers, physical and psychological abuse and ultimately deportations without a fair initial hearing or the exhaustion of available appellate recourse. I argue that this expanded use of civil immigration detention is designed to weaken constitutional due process protections, bringing into the U.S. detention tactics adopted abroad under the rubric of the war on terror. This paper also highlights similarities between the evolving administrative detention system in the United States and longer-standing practices in Israel.

Following in the footsteps of critics of the 1920s and 1930s, Caleb Foote's 1954 study of the bail system in Philadelphia set the agenda for bail reform in the United States focusing on judicial discretion and the inequities of a predominantly financially based pretrial detention system. This article argues that the bail reform movement originating in the 1960s fell short of its objectives in its failure to engage judges in the business of reform. From Foote's study on, Philadelphia has played a role historically in studies of bail, detention, and reform. The article considers the experience of Philadelphia's judicial pretrial release guidelines innovation from the 1980s to the present and its implications as an important contemporary bail reform strategy in addressing the problems of bail, release, and detention practices. The implications of the judge-centered pretrial release guidelines strategy for addressing pretrial release problems in urban state court systems are discussed in light of the original aims and issues of early bail reform.

Many migrants are detained in Europe not because they have committed a crime but because of lack of certainty over their immigration status. Although generally in good physical health on entry to Europe, migrant detainees have complex health needs, often related to mental health. Very little is known about the current health situation and health care needs of migrants when detained in European immigration detention settings. The review aims to synthesize the qualitative literature available on this issue from the perspectives of staff and migrants.

The authors undertook a synthesis of extant qualitative literature on migrant health experience and health situation when detained in European immigration detention settings; retrieved as part of a large-scale scoping review. Included records (n = 4) from Sweden and the UK representing both detainee and staff experiences were charted, synthesised and thematically analysed.

Three themes emerged from the analysis, namely, conditions in immigration detention settings, uncertainties and communication barriers and considerations of migrant detainee health. Conditions were described as inhumane, resembling prison and underpinned by communication difficulties, lack of adequate nutrition and responsive health care.

It is crucial that the experiences underpinning migration are understood to respond to the health needs of migrants, uphold their health rights and to ensure equitable access to health care in immigration detention settings.

There is a dearth of qualitative research in this area because of the difficulty of access to immigration detention settings for migrants. The authors highlight the critical need for further investigation of migrant health needs, so as to inform appropriate staff support and health service responses.

This paper aims to explore the impact of stressors and the strategies staff use to cope with these at a detention facility. It documents through case studies some of the triggers of trauma, possible coping mechanisms that might assist in navigating the associated stressors in a workplace and recommendations as to what might assist staff.

A naturalist approach was used in this research, using an ethnographic qualitative methodology. Grounded theory assisted in the analysis of the data to capture naturalistically the subjective experience of the participants of the study. Conversations occurred with staff who had worked in a detention facility using face to face semi-structured interviews. The structure was open-ended to allow the staff to discuss and share their experiences freely.

Stressors that impacted staff working in a detention facility resulted from areas such as heightened reactions from detainees because of the length of their detainment, detainee self-harm, dealing with the effects of an increase of substance abuse through detainees obtaining contraband and the associated violent reactions that can occur as a result. Adverse symptoms noted within the lives of staff included acute anxiety, sleeplessness, depression and tension within impersonal relationships, including family. What compounded the issue was staffs’ reluctance to talk about work stressors.

The research used nine participants for case studies of staff who had formerly experienced various adverse impacts of stressors. This is not a comprehensive study, however, of the broader experiences of staff at an Australian detention facility. It does provide, however, a snapshot of the experiences of a small group who had significantly been impacted by the stressors of the workplace.

This paper provides fresh perspectives or initiatives that are needed to assist staff to navigate the changing environment of working in a detention facility. In particular, some support mechanisms and protective factors that could be put in place to curb the negative impact of stressors in the workplace and to mitigate against long term stress disorders developing in the personal lives of staff.

Many staff are not getting the help they need to cope with the emotional distress they experience in their workplace. However, there are practical interventions to support staff in managing the stressors they face. These will be outlined in this article.

This study was carried out with the goal of giving staff a voice and to capture their former experiences in their vocational responsibilities in a venue that has had very limited research attention. This study has presented the challenges staff faced in a unique venue of working in a detention facility. It has documented some of the common stressors staff faced, the impact of such and some coping mechanisms used to handle them.

The purpose of this study is to fill the gap and apply a fault tree analysis (FTA) in detention lists of Black Sea Region published port state reports from 2005 to 2016. The study analyzes valid records of 2,653 detained ships with 6,374 deficiencies based on a strategic management approach. This paper sets up FTA technique to assess the detention probability of a random ship which calls the Black Sea Region with the help of detention lists published within subject years.

This paper is not published elsewhere, and it is based on an original work, which figures out detention probability of a regular ship at Black Sea Region port state control from published lists of Black Sea Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). By utilizing these detention lists, a generic fault tree diagram is drawn. Those probabilities could be used strategically with the most seen deficiencies in the region which all could guide the users, rule makers and the controllers of the maritime system.

FTA has conducted based on the data which was collected from website of BS MoU detention lists that published from 2005 to 2016. Those lists have been published on monthly basis from 2011 to 2016 and on quarterly basis from 2005 to 2010. Proper detention records have been included into the research, whereas some missing records were excluded. Subject lists have been harmonized and rearranged according to Black Sea MoU Detention Codes which was published on October 2017 at Black Sea MoU’s website. According to BS MoU Annual Reports, 58,620 ships were inspected from 2005 to 2016 as seen in Table 1. Those ships were inspected by each member country’s PSOs in the light and guidance of predefined selection criteria of the region. Detention frequency of inspected ships detected as 0.103116 which explains any ship that called any port in the Black Sea Region could be 10% detained after inspected by PSO. Also, each intermediate event-calculated frequency enlightens the probabilities of nonconformities of ships. Although those deficiencies show structural safety and security nonconformities, those probabilities also prove us that management side of the ships are not enough to manage and apply a safety culture. By the light of that, ship owners/managers could see the general nonconformities according to regional records and could manage their fleet and each ship as per those necessities.

In the light of the above analysis, the future research on this subject could be studied on other regions which might enable a benchmark opportunity to users. Also, insurance underwriters have their own reports and publications that could clarify different points of view for merchant mariners and regulators. In this research, FTA is used as a main method to figure out the root causes of the detentions. For future researches, different qualitative and quantitative methods could be used under the direction of subjects.

Detention frequency of inspected ships detected as 0.103116 which explains any ship that called any port in the Black Sea Region could be 10% detained after inspected by PSO. Also, each intermediate event-calculated frequency enlightens the probabilities of nonconformities of ships. Although those deficiencies show structural safety and security nonconformities, those probabilities also prove us that management side of the ships are not enough to manage and apply safety culture. By the light of that, ship owners/managers could see the general nonconformities according to regional records and could manage their fleet and each ship as per those necessities.

With the nature of carriage, shipping business carry out its essential economic attendance in world trade system via inclusion in national and international transportation. As a catalyst in international trade, shipping itself enables time, place and economic benefits to users (Bosneagu, Coca and Sorescu, 2015). Social and institutional pressures generate shipping industry as one of the most regulated global industries which creates high complexity. Industry evolved to multi-directional structure ranges from international conventions (IMO and ILO) to “supra-national interferences” (EU directives), to regional guidance (MoUs) to national laws (flag states). Ship operators endeavor to adopt/fit its industry environment where rules are obvious. With adaptation of industrial environment, ship operators are able to create an important core competency.

This study enlightens the most recorded deficiencies and analyzed them with the help of fault three method. These calculated frequencies/probabilities show the most seen nonconformities and the root causes of detentions in the Black Sea Region in which those results will be benefited strategically that enables a holistic point of view that guide the owners/managers, charterers/sellers/shippers, classification societies, marine insurance underwriters, ship investors, third parties, rule makers and the controllers of the system to apply safety culture.

Liberal democratic states have involved the use of private companies for purposes of detention and the debate is whether such involvement is only for immigration control or whether they are primarily for macro-economic benefits. This paper aims to present the argument that a State wishing to detain migrants must do so within the purview of immigration control and in conformity to international human rights standards rather than other latent reasons such as macro-economic benefits. The exponential growths of immigration detention over the years, this paper argues, smack of latent reasons with unarguably macro-economic benefits accruing to these States.

The methodology is doctrinal research focusing on immigration detention and privatization. Doctrinal research is library-based and reliance will be placed on primary and secondary materials such as legislations, case laws, soft laws on the one hand and textbooks, journals, articles, legal encyclopedia, databases and many valuable websites on the other hand.

Findings have been made of similarities in State practice between the UK, the USA and Australia and conclude that the trend is worrying given that privatization of the detention estate lends credence to the fact that growing international prison industry influences prison and detention policies.

These have portent implications for the violations of the rights of detainees and weaken the protection of rights under international human rights law.

The originality of this paper lies in its ability to unravel the legitimacy of immigration detention in the face of privatization and macro-economic benefits accruing to States, thereby querying the availability of the rights of migrants within the remit of State practice.

Existing quantitative research demonstrates negatively impacted mental health outcomes for people detained in immigration removal centres (IRCs) in the UK. However, there is limited qualitative research on the phenomenology of life inside UK IRCs. The purpose of this paper is to explore the psychosocial stressors experienced by people in detention, the psychological impacts of being detained and the ways in which people express resilience and cope in detention.

In-depth interviews were conducted with nine people who had previously been held in UK IRCs. Interview transcripts were analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis.

Participants experienced incredulity and cognitive dissonance at being detained, and found themselves deprived of communication and healthcare needs. These stressors led participants to feel powerless, doubt themselves and their worldviews, and ruminate about their uncertain futures. However, participants also demonstrated resilience, and used proactive behaviours, spirituality and personal relationships to cope in detention. Antonovsky’s (1979) theory on wellbeing – sense of coherence – was found to have particular explanatory value for these findings.

The sample of participants used in this study was skewed towards male, Iranian asylum seekers, and the findings therefore may have less applicability to the experiences of females, ex-prisoners and people from different geographical and cultural backgrounds.

This study offers a range of new insights into how detention in the UK impacts on people’s lives. The findings may be useful to policy makers who legislate on and regulate the UK immigration detention system, as well as custodial staff and health and social care practitioners working in IRCs.

This paper studies the experiences of asylum seekers in Australia. The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between mental wellbeing, living conditions, and Australia’s detention policies in light of human rights.

Using grounded theory, data were collected via observations, semi-structured interviews, key-informant interviews, and document analysis. Participants included seven asylum seekers and three professionals working with them.

In light of a human rights framework, this paper reports on the mental distress suffered by asylum seekers in detention, the environments of constraint in which they live, and aspects of detention centre policy that contribute to these environments. The findings highlight a discrepancy between asylum seekers’ experiences under immigration detention policy and Australia’s human rights obligations.

This research indicates human rights violations for asylum seekers in detention in Australia. This research project involved a small number of participants and recommends systemic review of the policy and practices that affect asylum seekers’ mental health including larger numbers of participants. Consideration is made of alternatives to detention as well as improving detention centre conditions. The World Health Organization’s Quality Rights Tool Kit might provide the basis for a framework to review Australia’s immigration detention system with particular focus on the poor mental wellbeing of asylum seekers in detention.

This study links international human rights law and Australian immigration detention policies and practices with daily life experiences of suffering mental distress within environments of constraint and isolation. It identifies asylum seekers as a vulnerable population with respect to human rights and mental wellbeing. Of particular value is the inclusion of asylum seekers themselves in interviews.